Such as names, Facebook pages, phone numbers, addresses, etc. This can also include contact information of public officials or groups (see rule 3). This is grounds for an immediate (and likely permanent) ban, so consider this a warning.

3. No Witch-Hunting

Or incitement to witch-hunt. This means no demanding "Reddit Justice" in any way in post titles or comments. This also includes posting contact information of public officials or groups in an any manner that could be seen as an attempt to get users to contact them.

If your submission does not appear in the new queue, please contact us (be sure to include a link to the Reddit post (i.e. comments section), not the content you are linking). Simply deleting your post may cause the spam filter to catch future ones.

Note: Submissions from new users, and users with low karma, are automatically removed to help prevent spam.

Also, please contact us regarding spam, political or any other inappropriate videos, as this helps us remove them more quickly!

Do not message moderators individually about posts not appearing in the new queue. Messages should be sent as a modmail to /r/Videos. Failure to do so may result in a ban.

Like trying to get off the boat and onto the beach in battlefield 1942 Medal of Honor:Allied Assault? I started to comprehend the fear when I was on my 100th life and I had finally made it to the sand. I think the first 5-10 live I lost just trying to get off the damn boat. I knew it was brutal, but the game made it more real to me somehow.

It still could be battlefield 1942. On Wake Island the Japanese team starts the game on a carrier and destroyer. At the start of the game you would have to load up on boats and and storm the beaches against American cannon fire and planes.

I honestly can't even comprehend being in that situation. You throw me in there, and I'll lie down in the boat and just not move. That, or I'll take my chances swimming back out into open sea with full gear.

In Marine boot camp they do many things to break a person down mentally. First and foremost you're isolated from everything and everyone you ever knew. For three months the only mode of communication between you and your girlfriend/parents is handwritten letters. The second method is constant pressure. All day from the sound of reveille (wake up) to the playing of Taps (bedtime) drill instructors are at full speed and full volume. These guys are robots, big black scary loud robots. They do not ever stop. It's kind of nuts.

Drill instructors will scream at you 1/2" from your face, spewing saliva from their mouths, then jump onto your footlocker directly behind you, stomp their feet, and yell at the top of their lungs directly into your ear. They'll do this for anything, from twitching any muscle in your body to missing a hair on your face when shaving. Sometimes, you'll do everything perfectly and they'll do it for no reason at all. And then there's the time your buddy that sleeps on the rack above you didn't have time to finish tying his boot before the drill instructors finished their countdown. Both of you get sent to the "quarterdeck" to get "smoked". Think of the scariest and meanest personal trainer you've ever met. PUUUUSSHHH! CRUNCHES! SIDE STRADDLE HOPS (jumping jacks to a civilian)! PUUUUSSSH! You're constantly changing exercises until the drill instructor gets tired of watching you fumble around like an idiot. Then you go back and join the other recruits.

Oh, and every time a drill instructor says anything, you're screaming at the top of your lungs until your throat is bleeding either "AYE AYE, SIR", "YES, SIR", or "NO, SIR".

You can imagine that no one in their right mind likes any of this, but the recruits get to know each other and bond. Before you even realize it, you can identify Smith in the dark from 100 feet away just by how his silhouette moves. You can identify anybody in your platoon of 60-90 recruits.

In martial arts training, whenever you throw a punch or kick, you scream "kill!". I consider this the brainwashing part of boot camp. I feel it's conditioning the mind to be more accepting to kill a person. But I'm no psychologist so I could be wrong.

By the end of your three months at boot camp, you've learned everything you need to know about Marine Corps culture and pride. You're ready and willing to give up your life for your fellow privates and new best friends to your left and right. You're ready and willing to fight and kill for the memory of all the Marines that came before you, from Iwo Jima to Hue City to Fallujah.

So that's it in a nutshell.

To any other Marines reading this; sorry for being a mo-tard, the mood just struck me.

the comedian Adam Carolla had a joke about this. said that he was never into video games but figured he'd finally go pick one up. went to the store and saw the box with all the what-have-you artwork and he thought it was interesting. started playing the game and never even made it out the boat.

Out of all the Call of Duty games I have played. CoD: 2, is still my favourite, online, CoD experience.

Just running around with bolt actions pretty much playing quick draw with any opponent you came across. There was no second chance if you got hit, they were one hit kills. The game made me check corners and roof-tops, none of this run and gun.

How is the community for PR these days? I use to be a regular in the Tactical Gamer server. It is probably the most fun I have ever had in a game. I played for a year straight, but I lost the freetime.

The latest BF2 build also includes several minimods/bonus maps that community members contributed to making, including PR:Normandy.

I have never experienced anything like a d-day beach assault with 150 + players on a server.

I was with my squad on mumble, in a landing craft, the high cliff face and seemingly endless beach full of barbed wire grew closer and closer.

You could make out the faint outlines of the enemy machine guns prickling out like angry thorns from their bunkers and entrenchments. The enemy began firing, but did not have our now feeble seeming assault force zeroed in yet. Everyone knew though that it was only a matter of time.

We were getting nervous now, fully aware of our own mortality. I looked towards my left to see another lander, just as an artillery shell ripped its way right through it, sending them all to the depths and back to the spawn menu.

We finally made it to the beach. The world around me lit up. I heard my SL yell for us to get up the beach and find cover, as he threw smoke grenades in an attempt to conceal us. I ran for a small trench just a few yards ahead and heard a deafening roar just behined me. I had taken some shrapnel, but was alive. Ears ringing and nearly blind from suppression, and coughing blood I dove for the cover.

The rest of my squad did not make it. Looking to my right I saw 4 of my fellow soldiers huddled together. I crawled my way over to them, and received first aid from the medic that was with them. With the proximity chat, we formed a plan. We needed better cover, and to get off this damn beach.

We would go in pairs of two further up the beach, while the other two would provide as much covering fire on the nearest bunker as possible. I started firing, and yelled for the first two to go. They made it, and then they started providing cover for me and the medic.

We both bolted ahead to where the other two were. Halfway between, my lower leg shattered as a round ripped through it. I barely had time to react as another round embedded itself right in the chest, and I went down. Coughing blood again, I passed out.

An unknown length of time passed. I awoke to pain coming from my chest. Someone was pressing on it, yelling at me to get on my feet. I felt a needle jab into my arm. I could feel the pure adrenaline rushing though my weary body. Bandages were applied, they got the bleeding somehow stopped. The rest of our forces had driven the germans back, we had taken the beach and most of the cliffside bunkers.

I had survived.

But it wasnt over. We still had 4km more of german occupied land to take.

And we could hear a deep rumble coming from across the fields. The kind of rumble that strikes fear into the souls of men.

The second line force of the germans were advancing.

...And they brought tanks.

Oh wow I didnt think this would be so long, I should really get some sleep.

But yeah the game is awesome, many game modes, including some of the best asymmetrical warfare I have ever seen, every time I play something rather incredible seems to happen. This is the only FPS I have ever seen where you can go the entire round without getting a kill, yet still have a blast, provided you can accept the "brick wall" of a learning curve it has.

If anyone hasn't watched arma 2 YouTube videos from CHKilroy, Dslyecxi, or Beaglerush, you fucking should. Shit is so good. Including the fact that CHKilroy almost drank himself to death on a New Years Eve live stream a few days ago.

Whenever I'm in a squad I opt to be the automatic rifleman or machine gunner then I select the L7A2 GPMG with all the ammo I can carry and just go mad with it, feels so good just to spray down the enemy, bonus if the server allows the scoped version.

True. Suppressing fire is often the only way to close distance with enemy forces and allows support elements to flank and destroy. In a dismounted fire team, suppressing fire is generally performed by a machine gunner carrying an M249 SAW to give riflemen (M4) a chance to either close distance or set up more precise shots using optics (like the ACOG) for you Callers of Duty. Keep their heads down with "accuracy by rate of fire", close distance, and eliminate the threat. Ain't nobody gonna stand up into a hail of 5.56... ain't nobody.
Source: I'm a machine gunner in Afghanistan.

Definitely. Indiscriminate shooting is bad. There are a few different methods that the Army trains gunners on for maximum effect while minimizing collateral damage. Generally every 5th round in a belt is a tracer round which are used, along with other signs like flying dirt, to observe where your rounds are impacting. The placement of tracers in the belt explains the controlled 5 to 7 round burst, which is advised. A lot comes into play when laying down suppressive fire, such as civilians on the battlefield (COBs) and civilian infrastructure, and friendly forces. In an ideal suppressive fire situation, such as an open field or desert, a Z pattern of fire is often advised to provide the most effective cover for flanking, pressing through, or drawing back.

So we're trained that when we get into a scuffle you lay down fire on what you believe to be the point of origin. This alleviates some of the fire coming from the enemy, as now he has rounds snap by him and is a little less willing to take nice, accurate shots. Then you take cover. Afterwards, you either retreat out of the engagement area or, if you believe you have the upper hand or your just stuck out into the open, you assault the enemy positions and destroy them. We're trained to buddy rush in some of these instances. I've got a friend whose platoon was ambushed in Helmand by a about a platoon sized taliban element (about 40 guys). They took fire while trying to cross an open area from a vegetated area. They we're stuck in the open with no cover and rushed through the enemy. In the end, they only suffered 1 priority casualty and 4 other injuries, but wiped out the entire taliban unit. In Sebastian Junger's book "War," he writes about a similar instance and notes because of our training to put forth the unit's best interest and not our own, we can get into seemingly disastrous situations but still win the fight.

Confirming kills is just a matter of what goes on the sworn statements following a firefight. Generally speaking, whatever the patrol/raid leader estimates as enemy losses is what goes down on the books. There's no in-depth investigation or effort to collect/count bodies after most firefights; unless your side is left in complete control of the field afterward, doing so just exposes you to follow-on attacks. If you're pushing back an attack on your outpost, then sure, you can go out tomorrow in the light of day and collect bodies. But if you're ambushed, your first priority is to get the hell out of dodge, and no one is going to count the corpses afterward.

We did several BDA's (battle damage assessment) on my last tour in afghanistan (april-october 2011). Thats how we confirmed kills. Idk when we started doing them, but its fucking stupid. Usually the taliban emplace ied's and wait for us to be on the other side of them, open fire, and hope we try to close the distance. It worked for a while too (marines love running towards gunfire), but now we just sit and shoot back... Its also too risky to seak cover. They've been watching us for ten years, they know what we like to use as cover, and they always put something there. I call them the most retarded fuckers while im at work, but you gotta admit that they are some clever bastards.W

Same thing happened in Vietnam really. Line the ditches next to the road with mines, sharpened sticks and whatever else they can think of. Pop a few shots at an infantry column and watch them dive right into it.

It seems like that's a pretty easy way to have pretty inaccurate numbers too, I don't blame anyone for not wanting to get shot collecting/counting bodies that were trying to kill you just hours ago though.

I wasn't trying to say that. But a transport truck getting blown up by a tank/shredded with a browning .50 cal? No accurate way to tell if it was carring men or supplies.

I'm not saying they are embellishing or purposely giving low estiments but from some one who hasn't seen war first hand it just seems like there are way too many variables to have an educated guess a right number in a lot of different scenarios.

Obviously a sniper team will be able to tell you exactly who they killed and probably a discription of all their targets depending on the mission.

Special forces will typically be able to tell you the same if they get in and out without being ambushed.

But patroles who get ambushed (I'm guessing that was most of the conflict in Iraq/afganistan it would seem impossible for everyone to be like "ok yeah I shot that one dude in the stripped shirt and the three guys who were wearing cammies from the sadam erea..." it's more like "I was shooting at a metric ass ton of people who were trying to shoot me, and we maybe shot 2 guys before we got out of dodge."

The minigun was widely used in Viet Nam. I knew a guy during that war who sat in a radio hut all night calling in these converted DC-3's equipped with three of them:

using the call sign "Spooky," each of its three 7.62 mm miniguns could selectively fire either 50 or 100 rounds per second. Cruising in an overhead left-hand orbit at 120 knots air speed at an altitude of 3,000 ft, the gunship could put a bullet or glowing red tracer (every fifth round) bullet into every square yard of a football field-sized target in potentially less than 10 seconds. They could also loiter over a target for hours, firing repeatedly when needed. That's a lot of rounds.

I'm wondering if it's partially to do with the terrain. Heavy jungle environment making visibility even worse combined with the lighter 5.56 bullet which (so I've read) was more prone to deflection when hitting the canopy.

Also combine that with the fact that the army was armed entirely with fully automatic weapons as compared to previous wars (SA M1 Garand vs. FA M16).

"Marshall's work on infantry combat effectiveness in World War II, titled Men Against Fire, is his best-known and most controversial work. In the book, Marshall claimed that of the World War II U.S. troops in actual combat, 75% never fired their personal weapons at the enemy for the purpose of killing, even though they were engaged in combat and under direct threat. (Later research has cast doubts on his methods, but research into killing ratios of other wars, including the U.S. Civil War, has supported this claim.) Marshall argued that the United States Army should devote significant training resources to increase the percentage of soldiers willing to engage the enemy with direct fire."

Exactly. Can you actually imagine the veterans telling the new guy to shoot at targets they can't see? How would that conversation even go, "I know you're just out of basic, you haven't slept or shit in days, but when it's dark and raining and a firefight breaks out, just unload in the general direction of the gun shot sounds. It's called suppressive fire. I read about it on reddit."

In some instances soldiers wont shoot at enemy they can actually see. It'd be interesting to see how much is put towards the psychological training of the modern day soldiers to prepare them to kill a fellow human.

I gotta agree. Ancient Aliens may not be very scientifically accurate, but it at least explores history in a way. Hell, even Pawn Stars and American Pickers has a tenuous connection to history, because most of the stuff sold/picked is historical to an extent. Even if it only goes back to the 90s, it's still historical stuff.

I gotta agree, the gold rush and truck shows are absolutely idiotic. It's like they've become the reality TV network. It's as bad as Sci-Fi... I mean SyFy putting wrestling on.

I got to disagree. History has been doing really well lately, with shows like "I Love The 1880s", "Mankind The Story of All of Us", "How the States Got Their Shapes", "The Men That Built America", "Hatfields & McCoys", etc. which all have received significant airtime and promotion in the last couple of months. Even most of their softer shows like Pawn Stars and American Restoration still deal with actual historical artifacts and viewers are educated about that piece of history in an entertaining way. Honestly, documentaries aren't really great for getting people interested in a new historical subject since they tend to be pretty dry and not very engaging--the more dramatic format is actually pretty great at making the content both educational and entertaining.
Yeah they still occasionally show stuff like Ax Men and Ancient Aliens, but that sort of content is becoming less and less prevalent on the channel.

This is very true. Another contributing factor that people don't realize is that even if soldiers do know exactly where the enemy is, a person viewing the video after the fact still probably won't see them.

If it's a professional cameraman that's because they ussually aren't right on the line.

If it's a helmet cam it's because they aren't quite lined up with where the soldier is looking, and often don't have great picture quality to start with. e.g. These videos of soldiers in very short range engagements (graphic obviously)
US Special Forces and Afghan Police ambushed in a garage

To anybody wondering the 3rd linked video is from a documentary called Armadillo. It is currently on Netflix instant stream and is a must watch. Also Restrepo, which follows U.S. soldiers is a really good documentary also on Netflix.

Another contributing factor that people don't realize is that even if soldiers do know exactly where the enemy is, a person viewing the video after the fact still probably won't see them.

Exactly. There's a large number of videos I've seen where people have been saying "he's right next to the building, so and so many yards away, right there, moving left to right". They obviously know exactly where the guy is and can see them but they still don't show up on camera. It doesn't help that helmet cams have super-wide angle lenses.

There is a lot of things that soldiers do that may not make sense to those that haven't been in the military. They get the idea that they should act like the ones in a Hollywood movie. There are very few movies that portray soldiers in the right aspect, they usually just portray them to make things seem great on film, which is not correct.

There was an interesting video game that came out in the mid-2000s called Full Spectrum Warrior, and this was the basic premise. It was modeled after actual military training simulators, and if I'm remembering correctly from the demo, you couldn't even actually shoot at anything "directly." The reticle just let you target and area that you wanted each member of the squad (or the whole squad) to fire at. It was actually a refreshing break from normal first-person/third-person shooters that mostly focus on precise aiming and ammo conservation.

It is all about fire superiority and 'violence of action' as they put it in the Corps. As everyone else has already pointed out, suppressive fire is pretty effective. If you couple this with fast moving fire teams you can annihilate enemy elements pretty easily.

It is pretty much the M.O. of the Marine Rifle Squad: "To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver..."

Having served 17+ years in the US Army ,(9.5 years in actual combat operations) the concept of suppressive fire is a extremely effective and valid tactic.

The idea is this- for all you kids out there comparing your "combat experience" in Battlefield 2-3 or COD- units use massive volumes of fire to SUPPRESS enemy forces from firing back. This enables friendly forces to move into a flanking position to eliminate the enemy force. If you are trying to close the distance between you and a group of assholes trying to kill you, it is always better if they are busy ducking and praying to whatever god they believe in than looking towards your position taking a bead on you if you try to move.

On a side note - If you play video games and watch TV, this gives you no fucking clue what combat is like. Do not ever have the absolute insane belief that you know the first thing about it. Shut your mouth, you know less than nothing, and all you are doing is showing your ignorance and complete stupidity on the subject.

That's very often the case as well. Helmet cams have really, really wide angle lenses whereas the people are usually shooting at something hundreds of meters away. This makes it just about impossible to see anything happening in the distance.

it's called "suppressive fire". if you keep the enemy's heads down by firing rounds in their general direction, that could potentially hit them, then they can't shoot at you as your buddies move to get a better shot or possibly flank them. Infantrymen use their M249 SAWs, light machine guns, in alternating fashion (usually 2-3 in a squad) for this exact purpose. They affectionately calling it "singing" or "talking" SAWs.

Combat Vet here. When I was in Iraq I often spoke with an Army Liaison Officer that said that he frequently staged firefights for news crews. Basically they'd set up a MOUT range and the soldiers would clear an empty corner of the compound. The film crews would follow the soldiers and use tight shots, giving the appearance that they were protecting themselves against enemy fire. This allowed the reporter to get near-combat footage without ever leaving the base.

He did say that in Vietnam, the process was even less sophisticated. They would have the news crews film a couple rear echelon guys blasting rounds into tall grass, or over a ditch.

This is just a general military tactic. In HM Army we aim absolutely every shot, though, you have a SUSAT for a reason. You can supress enemy by firing in his general direction, or by firing right at him; we prefer the latter. I also think that the US Marines use aimed supressive fire, whilst the army are generally taught blanket fire.